Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~. .- <br /> <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br /> <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />Department of Natural Resources <br /> <br />721 State Centennial Building <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver. Colorado 80203 <br />Phone (303) 866-3441 <br />FAX (303) 866-4474 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Roy Romer <br />Governor <br /> <br />James S. Lochhead <br />Executive Director. DNR <br /> <br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />Danes C. Lile, P.E. <br />f)uector, CWCB <br /> <br />DATE: <br /> <br />The Lower South Platte Sustainment Project File <br /> <br />Bill Greertp {j" <br />May 16, 1995 <br /> <br />TO: <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br />SUBJECT: <br /> <br />Review of Reconnaissance Report <br /> <br />I have reviewed the Lower South Platte River Sustainment Project Reconnaissance Study <br />(undated) by RBD Inc. and have the following comments and questions: <br /> <br />1. On page 2 under Storable Water Resources, the report indicates that the period of <br />record used for the Julesburg Gage was from April 1902 to December 1993. Would a <br />more recent period of record better reflect the current flow regime on the river? <br /> <br />2. Also on page 2 under Storable Water Resources, what is the basis of the <br />assumption that withdrawals could be made when the flow at the gage exceeded 40 <br />cfs? What is the rationale for the dates of the two fill periods? Which flow records <br />are referred to with regard to the 3,049 and the 2,416 acre-feet which are available <br />95.5 percent of the time? <br /> <br />3. On page 17, I don't understand the sentence: "All of the sites studied do not <br />appear to offer significant benefits from recharge due to their close proximity to the <br />river. " <br /> <br />4. How firm is the supply developed from local surface water inflows given the soils <br />and geology of the area? Isn't runoff likely to be a rare event? <br /> <br />5. On page 18, the annual payment on $1,115,000 at 4.5 percent for 30 years should <br />be approximately $68,450. Adding this amount to the estimated annual operating costs <br />of $7,750 gives an annual cost of $76,200. Comparing this to the estimated annual <br />revenues of $55,798 indicates a loss of about $20,000 per year. <br />